MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W74287576

Media Literacy and Student/teacher Engagement

2006· article· en· W74287576 on OpenAlex
Paul Mihailidis, Ray E. Hiebert

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic exchange quarterly · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiteracy, Media, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedia literacyStudent engagementPedagogyPsychologyLiteracySet (abstract data type)Mathematics educationSociologyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Media literacy education aims to enable students to critically and analytically engage with media. Teacher/Student engagement in the classroom enables students to enhance their learning experiences by providing them the atmosphere and interaction they need to be actively involved in their learning process. tenets of teacher/student engagement and mutuality, when applied to the concept of media literacy education, reveal how media literacy education can be enhanced in the classroom. Introduction Most of all, bringing media culture into the learning environment--from kindergarten to graduate school--guarantees a high level of engagement by students. And engagement, as every teacher knows, is the key to learning success. (Thoman & Jolls, 2004, 20) Media literacy education aims to develop a skill set encompassing the abilities to access, analyze, evaluate, and produce media (Rogow, 2004). How teachers teach about media and how students engage with media become the base upon which these skills can be effectively realized. hope is that these skills will lead to students becoming more knowledgeable, aware and active participants in a democratic society. Canadian educator Chris Worsnop (Seeman, 2004, 19) writes of the need for media educators to focus on mutual respect and engagement: Good media education courses do not focus on propagandizing students into a single way of thinking. They provide students with a broad range of critical and analytical skills to help them make their own choices and decisions about the ideological and political messages surrounding them in 21st century culture ... Media education teachers focus on respecting students' choices and decisions regardless of their orientation, provided those choices and decisions are well formed and properly supported. main question this analytic essay will address is: how can we enhance media literacy education through teacher/student mutual engagement in the classroom? aim is to explore how the tenets of teacher/student engagement can be applied to media literacy education. This essay will reveal how such mutual engagement can lead to more critical and analytical reflection of media messages from a young age. hope in addressing such an inquiry is that better insight can be attained as to how teacher/student engagement can enhance media literacy education for a more aware and participative future citizenry. Critical, student-centered education Thoman and Jolls (2004, 27) envision media literacy as a tool for empowering citizens: The vision of media literacy is to put all individuals, ultimately, in charge of their own learning, empowering them to take an active rather than a passive role in acquiring new knowledge and skills. Where media education departs from traditional teacher-oriented, top down dissemination of knowledge is in its aim to engage citizens to become active and reflexive in learning about information. It is not that media literacy offers new and flesh content for educators to grapple with; rather, it offers a new way for educators to teach, and even more importantly, a new way for students to learn (Thoman & Jolls, 2004). Media literacy education's progress further rests on its emphasis as a pedagogical tool. Cynthia Schiebe (2004) refers to this as a curriculum-driven approach. This approach posits that teachers must interweave active teaching about the media within their basic classroom lessons. Schiebe (2004, 63) explains: Teachers then feel more comfortable about taking class time to teach the basics of media literacy and to weave a media literacy approach into their overall teaching practice. Media literacy can also be used to develop 'parallel tasks' for students to build and practice their skills in analyzing their opinions with evidence in written essays. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it